乞靈祝聖與人文化成： 史特勞斯與布克哈特政治書寫之技藝— 政治靈知主義與政治人文主義

Abstract

本文提出三個主要關懷。第一，本文以Kuhn-Pocock之政治思想史典範詮釋論，提出詮釋西方政治思想演進兩種可能的典範：政治人文主義與政治靈知主義存在之可能。政治人文主義，係主張所有人類行動與知識的根源當存於人自身，完成於人自身之思維模式；政治靈知主義，則將人之行動與知識根源建構在外於塵世之絕對存有，如理型，上帝，歷史意志等觀念。兩個典範在西方思想史演進中供給理論建構之終極價值與方法根源，彼此交疊置換於西方思想語境之優勢地位中，且相互競逐並掠取「理論質素」。 第二，本文以瑞士歷史學家布克哈特，猶裔政治哲學家史特勞斯分為政治人文主義與政治靈知主義之當代典範。二者皆透過對該時代主流論述語言，政治價值，以及世界觀之基�激進修訂與批判，完成其同等獨特的理論關懷。布克哈特對當時數種重要的歷史思想與政治理念之批判，以及史特勞斯對當代政治科學，政治哲學，與政治理論的批判在在呈現其分屬二種典範所展露之思想特質。 若政治行動之理據為政治思想，則政治思想本身之理據，來自於其典範內在價值；順此理據，本文遂欲將政治人文主義與政治靈知主義提升重要之政治實踐地位，亦為布氏與史氏二者的核心關懷。本文認為，兩種典範重新賦予當代自由民主政治內在理據所缺乏的根本力量，政治人文主義之英雄精神及政治靈知主義的聖徒精神，皆供給當代政治抵禦未來可能之毀滅力量之重要基礎。

Three main arguments constitute this thesis. First of all, I propose two possible paradigms, the model to explain the structure of scientific revolution advanced by Thomas Kuhn and later modified by J.G.A. Pocock who makes the concept be appropriate in the study on history of political though: The one is Political Humanism, which sets all important and ultimate principles of political actions, thoughts, and moralities on human-self, and the other is Political Gnosticism, which requests piety and obey from human on the same matters with Political Humanism. The two paradigms support the necessary ideas for theory-writers when they deal with exact the same principle as political actions, thoughts, and moralities. After reviewing the developing process of two paradigms, we believe they not only overlap and co-exist in the political theory writing language, but also appropriate the theoretical elements from each other. Secondly, I take Swiss historian Jacob Burckhardt as the contemporary Political Humanism illustration, and Jewish American political philosopher Leo Strauss as the Political Gnosticism one. They both opposed some current elements in their time and main thoughts, and proposed radical modification according to the two paradigms. Burckhardt criticized the 19th Germany Historicism, followed the cultural historical method, and emphasized the human idea in history, political, and world-view thinking, especially in his Greek, Rome, and Renaissance interpretation. Similarly but not identical, Strauss, facing the predicament of historicism, relativism, and nihilism, evoked the two-competing-model which are Athens (classical political philosophy) and Jerusalem ( the teaching of Bible) underlining the role of absolutely right, justice, and moral in political thinking. I try to prove in the second part of this thesis, which are the Chapter 3 & 4, their theory-writing embody the characteristics of the two paradigms. In conclusion, I advocate the effects of the two paradigms incarnated in Burckhardt and Strauss are the re-empowerment of politics. Burckhardt and Political Humanism empowered the politic to be active, animate, and invigorate; Strauss and Political Gnosticism made the politics be orderly, absolutely, and stable. The two-sided paradigms both give the politics the active/orderly power it needs, and make it strong enough to endure the possible-coming political turmoil.